Re: Memoize ANTI and SEMI JOIN inner
От | Alena Rybakina |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Memoize ANTI and SEMI JOIN inner |
Дата | |
Msg-id | b63acc7a-60bc-4595-81a9-fc6de22e367f@postgrespro.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Memoize ANTI and SEMI JOIN inner (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Memoize ANTI and SEMI JOIN inner
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 31.03.2025 06:04, David Rowley wrote:
I tend to agree with you that someone might set this flag to true for these join types in the future.On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 15:33, Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru> wrote:I believe it's worth asserting that both inner_unique and single_mode are not true at the same time — just as a safety check.add_paths_to_joinrel() just chooses not to populate inner_unique for SEMI and ANTI joins because, as of today's master, it's pretty pointless to determine that because the executor will short-circuit and skip to the next outer tuple for those join types anyway. I don't follow why having both these flags set would cause trouble. It seems perfectly legitimate that add_paths_to_joinrel() could choose to set the inner_unique flag for these join types, and if it did, the Assert you're proposing would fail for no good reason.
However, is it necessary to check that extra->inner_unique must be false for SEMI/ANTI joins here, or am I missing something? It looks a little confusing at this point.
if (!extra->inner_unique && (jointype == JOIN_SEMI || jointype == JOIN_ANTI))
single_mode = true;
--
Regards, Alena Rybakina Postgres Professional
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: